ZILE SINGH Vs. SANTOSH @ SANTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 9th August, 2018 by which the evidence of PW-4 has been directed to not be read and the evidence of Mr. Yashvir Singh, who was present from the Delhi Jal Board (hereinafter, "DJB"), was not recorded on the ground that the list of witnesses was not filed.

(2.) Ld. counsel for the Petitioner/Plaintiff (hereinafter, "Plaintiff") submits that in the examination-in-chief of PW-4 there was a mistake while recording the examination as no affidavit was filed by PW-4 - Mr. Rajbir, who was only an attesting witness to some of the documents. The affidavit ­ Ex.PW4/A was wrongly exhibited in the examination-in-chief, which was an error by the Plaintiff. However, it is submitted that PW-4 is an important witness, who is an attesting witness in all the documents and has exhibited the same as Ex.PW1/5, Ex.PW1/6, Ex.PW1/8, Ex.PW1/9, Ex.PW1/10. Accordingly, it is urged that his evidence ought to be read. It is further submitted that although the list of witnesses was inadvertently not filed, all the witnesses have been summoned by the Plaintiff and thus, their evidence ought to have been recorded by the ld. Trial Court.

(3.) Ld. counsel for the Respondents/Defendants (hereinafter, "Defendants") submits that the approach of the Plaintiff has been extremely casual. A perusal of the examination-in-chief shows that PW-4 had not filed any affidavit, however, the same was sought to be exhibited as PW4/A. It was under these circumstances that the Defendants had not received any copy of the affidavit and hence, the ld. Trial Court had directed that the evidence of PW-4 would not be read. Insofar as the witness from DJB is concerned, the Defendants had no notice of his appearance, inasmuch as no list of witnesses had been filed by the Plaintiff.